@FlyingHueman I had the exact same feeling for the F-35. After talking to members of the RAF and doing further research I think it’s going to be an incredible plane. I saw it flying last year at an airshow in the UK and it was magnificent. Also, the RAF is retiring it’s super Tucanos now which is very sad since it was always one of my favourites at the airshows. Brazilian aircraft are very nice.

@Mustang51 Yeah I did back in the day, and at least then, they didn't allow corrective surgery either. I'm happy with the path I chose instead though, so there's that.

And it's funny you mention that, our version of the "Thunderbirds" flies A-29s! They're a blast to look at, and because prop aircraft have unique characteristics such as torque they can pull off some crazy stunts at near stall speed. My favorite one is an adapted variation of the Lomcovak.

As for the F-35, that's a complicated subject, lel. We meme a lot about that plane, but honestly it's a pretty damn good aircraft, and with the way it's being conducted it's not going to end up being too expensive for countries to buy (let's see how operation/maintenance will turn out), especially considering the capabilities it brings to the table. It's been through some troubled development, sure, but I'd wager a good part of that is higher ups wanting to rush things. At the end of the day I think it's going to be an amazing fighter. I used to dislike its looks but it's grown on me lately.

Did you apply for the Brazilian Air Force and can you not get laser surgery in order to pass the eye test? The Tucano is one of my favourites as well, especially the CAS/COIN versions of it. Tone of my latest builds I’m working on now is somewhat Tucano inspired but was usually for my builds, it’s fictional. I like seeing all the COIN/CAS aircraft at air shows since they were all built very sturdy which usually allows the pilots to still do a few hard turns and ends up looking impressive. It’s funny that people who are studying that type of engineering don’t want to work on cars or planes. I used to want to study aeronautical engineering and got my physicals higher level degree in high school but at the last moment I decided not to. I’m still very interested in engineering but I’m happy with what I chose instead. It would be nice to have people doing European Law who were for some reason also very interested in aviation though hahahaha.

What is your opinion on the F-35? Everyone seems to have very different reasons for why they either love it or hate it.

@Mustang51 Oh, I do plan on getting a license on day, but flight hours are expensive around here (well, I suppose around the world as well, avgas ain't cheap) but right now I've got my hands full with trying to get to be able to build them, lol. I passed the written exam for the Air Force Academy but couldn't cut the physical ones (got eliminated by eyesight, it's just good enough that I don't need glasses but AFA around here doesn't accept anything less than 20/20. We've got few planes and the folk flying them have got to be the best of the best) so since I've always had an interest for figuring out how stuff works and why, and a lot of interest in the subject, I decided to go for engineering.

Also yeah the Mirage 2000 lags behind a bit, especially on electronics and payload, but with its looks I can definitely forgive it for that! Pretty good lift at high AoA though, vortex generation in slender deltas is nothing to scoff at.

Also yeah, sadly there's not much that can be done once we get part a certain point, where combat is decided mostly by electronics and you've gotta get a radar as big and powerful as possible on that plane, enough ECM gear, etc. Still, there are some pretty good planes that still follow the general outline of that concept - adapted to today's reality, where you can't make things so simple or cheap anymore, but you can reduce maintenance time/requirement and operational cost. The F-16 itself and the Gripen are two neat examples of this.

And yeah, light attack aircraft have a special place in my heart. The Universal/Tucano family also has quite the interesting story that would make an entire post on its own, but suffice to say it's got some German influence in it and a man named Heinrich Focke is involved. I quite like the Skyraider (though it's not exactly "light") and the Bronco too, the guys who flew them back in Vietnam had guts.

And likewise, it's great to talk to someone who enjoys planes that much, as well. It's a rare opportunity, even for a guy doing aeronautical engineering. Most people here want to work in banks and such.

@FlyingHueman and I totally understand the whole getting going thing when you start talking about aircraft hahaha. I have the same problem. It’s interesting you mention the mirage 2000 for looks alone. I love the way that aircraft looks but I find that that’s the only part of it I really like as its kind of lacking behind most other aircraft of its era (in my opinion at least). Also most of the aircraft you have a special mention to also have their special place for myself as well, especially the Catalina. I once had the opportunity to fly in one but I was very young and couldn’t appreciate the experience as much as I would have had I done it now.

@FlyingHueman You definitely know your stuff! It seems that we had almost entirely moved away from relatively simple aircraft designs up until recently with the designs for new light attack aircraft. It’s nice to speak with other people who share a passion for aircraft. Everyone I know, including pilots, who is interested in aeroplanes only seem to be interested in one specific aspect of it (e.g. just flying or just the mechanics) but it’s nice when the whole topic is of interest. Aviation is really fantastic. Do you fly at all or are you planning on getting a pilots licence at some point?

There are, of course, many other great guys with amazing stories, Rex Beisel, Jack Northrop, R.J Mitchell, Jack Northrop, the aformentioned Jiro Horikoshi and Willy Messerchmitt, the list goes on. Just like with the planes, there's too many to count.

A plane that gets special mentions for the looks alone is the Mirage 2000, beautiful bird. The F-16 and MiG-29 also get a special mention for having marked my childhool (thank you Novalogic) and to this day they're among my favorite modern-day fighters.

Then there's the planes I'm biased towards - the PBY-5 Catalina and P-47D Thunderbolt are planes I absolutely love but a good part of that is probably because Brazil used them in combat during WWII, lel. Then there's the planes designed here (or in partnerships like the AMX A-1/A-11 Ghibli), especially the Tucano family, with the T-25 Universal, T-27 Tucano and A-29 Super Tucano. They're amazing birds in their own right, and they follow that design philosophy of simplicity, low cost and effectiveness - I guess you could call it advanced simplicity, if it makes any sense - but then again, I'm biased, lel.

Btw, sorry for over-extending myself like this, but this topic really gets me going, lol. I love talking about planes.

@Mustang51 Hard question right there. I like all of them, but I suppose I have a strong preference for military aircraft and, somewhat, for general aviation/sports aircraft. I have some specific planes that rank among my favorites but that's too many to list, lol. For the most part though, I generally have a weak spot for planes that are simple but high-performance nonetheless. To me, that's the essence of engineering, make things as simple and easy to maintain as possible while keeping their effectiveness, and it requires a great deal of effort. So there's stuff like the A-4, Folland Gnat, F-5 and derivations, well, most fighters around. Why not, the Bf 109 and the Zero as well. The Zero was designed with several restrictions due to Japanese industry at the time, especially on the engine department, yet Horikoshi made such a well-refined design that it was one of the best fighters out there for quite some time until it just couldn't keep up anymore. The 109 was also designed to be as smooth, simple and high-performance as possible; Willy had experience with gliders and sports aircraft, and took the lesson of keeping weight down to the heart. Even after it had long been surpassed by other designs, its more advanced late variants could keep up a fight with some of the best Allied fighters around. And since I got myself started of WWII planes, why not mention the F4U Corsair - it doesn't exactly follow this "philosophy" I've been describing so far, but something about it just drags me in, lel. IMO, it's the finest fighter America produced during WWII.

And the men behind these aircraft are also something I enjoy reading about. Both the pilots who flew them and the engineers who designed them. There are many great engineers behind these machines who I admire a lot, and in the specific case of light fighters, these guys were going against all trends and made something that was absolutely successful. Ed Heinemann with the A-4, Ed Schmued with the F-5, W.E.W Petter didn't have much luck with the Gnat (though it was a plane that proved a point and led to many follow-ons like the G.91) but he had the very successful Canberra, and then we've got the absolute legend that is Kyle Johnson, which also made something following these principles, kind of a light fighter: the F-104. It gets a lot of bad rep, but when you really look into it, it's an amazing little machine too.

There are, of course, many other great guys with amazing stories, Rex Beisel, Jack Northrop, R.J

@FlyingHueman Yeah it’s the engines which give it that Sud feel. I see in your bio that you’ve always had passion for aviation. Any specific type of aircraft or time period you like in particular?

@Mustang51 Thanks! I didn't have the Vautour in mind, but now that you mention it, there's definitely a resemblance with how the engines are spaced apart, and the way the intakes are made. Might have been my subconsious after one hour too much of War Thunder...

And yet another very cool plane. Nice work! It reminds me of a cross between and Me-262 and a Sud Aviation Vautour. Great build!